We are watching you. Yeah, you...

[AE1PT]

I believe that most people understand at some level that the internet is monitored. There are those that are pretty clueless too...

This latest monitoring effort has me a bit concerned--as to who is compiling all of the IP addresses of purported file sharing or media sources--and what sort of media tracking exists to delineate content type.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/18/tech/w...tml?hpt=hp_bn5

[KG4CGC]

Charter just sends the Sony and RIAA goons after you, no warning. Great bunch of people.

[n2ize]

It is all a load of bullshit. Plenty of "illegal" copyrighted content appears on sites like UTube and there is no law against clicking on a link and watching a video which, in effect, downloads the video whether the user realizes it or not. There are also thousands of means by which files can be shared outside of P2P networking.

They will probably catch a number of clueless people downloading copy protected content via P2P networking. Those downloading content on a grand scale or making content available will simply adopt methods making themselves harder to track.

Eventually this too will go the way of RIAA lawsuits and DRM. Over the last decade or so I have read so many of these "crack down" articles.

There is also only so far the ISP's will go. They don't want to drive away business to defend an antiquated distribution system.

[N8YX]

I simply don't consume anything produced by the major labels. Once upon a time, a large portion of my discretionary income went to the purchase of CDs and (back in the day) vinyl...but nowadays there's nothing out there which compels me to spend upwards of $20 for an album. It's not worth searching for on a torrent, either.

I'll buy used CDs from the local shops or from eBay if I absolutely have to have a certain classic disc - but none of my income is directly going to help prop up an industry whose antiquated business model treats its customers as criminals.

So-called indie artists have begun to garner attention (and cash flow) from both of us.

[KJ3N]

I wonder if we'll see an uptick in IP anonymizer use.

Would IP anonymizer use thwart this kind of monitoring in the first place?

[AE1PT]

One of the problems I have seen with 'anonymizers' is that they appreciably slow down the transfer rates of uploads or downloads--simply due to the nature of how they operate. And depending on how badly those monitoring traffic want to trace--lose their effectiveness as more end user clients use them. And after a bit, those using multinodal proxies begin to attract attention to themselves. You can run, but one truly can't hide...

I am not really concerned here about the business model of the recording industry, P2P systems, or who considers what fucking illegal. John is right--we hear dire pronouncements all the time about that--and only a few of most clueless are the ones made high profile examples of. The internet wheel makes a turn and some new system is in place. A techno version of Whack-A-Mole.

What I am questioning here is what appears to be a much more sophisticated system of content identification and flagging. Similar to the face recognition system deployed by Farcebook for tagging purposes--such deployments bother me on two levels. First is the degree of active monitoring (as opposed to passive logging) by private concerns--and the inherent mistakes that such systems will make due to their very nature.

[n2ize]

I simply don't consume anything produced by the major labels. Once upon a time, a large portion of my discretionary income went to the purchase of CDs and (back in the day) vinyl...but nowadays there's nothing out there which compels me to spend upwards of $20 for an album. It's not worth searching for on a torrent, either.

I'll buy used CDs from the local shops or from eBay if I absolutely have to have a certain classic disc - but none of my income is directly going to help prop up an industry whose antiquated business model treats its customers as criminals.

So-called indie artists have begun to garner attention (and cash flow) from both of us.

I feel the same way about it. It's not the idea of copyrights that I have a problem with. It costs a lot of money and time and effort to produce many copyrighted works and I have no problem with buying the material. But what I object to is this whole "criminalization" approach that the RIAA/ MPAA, etc have adopted. The idea that I must be treated as a criminal, that it is assumed I am stealing their precious content and that unless my internet connection is continually tracked, monitored, probed, a profiled, I will try and get away with something. If they are that worried about their precious content then by all means they should lock the content up in a vault somewhere such that nobody has any access to it.

[N2NH]

We are watching you. Yeah, you...

Really? Must be a slow day. I live in terminal boredom.

[K7SGJ]

Really? Must be a slow day. I live in terminal boredom.

That's right outside of Akron, right?

[W2NAP]

Similar to the face recognition system deployed by Farcebook for tagging purposes--such deployments bother me on two levels. First is the degree of active monitoring (as opposed to passive logging) by private concerns--and the inherent mistakes that such systems will make due to their very nature.

I dont post pictures of myself online. period.